2017 ORS 419B.839¹
Required and discretionary summons

(1) Summons in proceedings to establish jurisdiction under ORS 419B.100 (Jurisdiction) must be served on:

(a) The parents of the child without regard to who has legal or physical custody of the child;

(b) The legal guardian of the child;

(c) A putative father of the child who satisfies the criteria set out in ORS 419B.875 (Parties to proceedings) (1)(a)(C), except as provided in subsection (4) of this section;

(d) A putative father of the child if notice of the initiation of filiation or parentage proceedings was on file with the Center for Health Statistics of the Oregon Health Authority prior to the initiation of the juvenile court proceedings, except as provided in subsection (4) of this section;

(e) The person who has physical custody of the child, if the child is not in the physical custody of a parent; and

(f) The child, if the child is 12 years of age or older.

(2) If it appears to the court that the welfare of the child or of the public requires that the child immediately be taken into custody, the court may indorse an order on the summons directing the officer serving it to take the child into custody.

(3) Summons may be issued requiring the appearance of any person whose presence the court deems necessary.

(4) Summons under subsection (1) of this section is not required to be given to a putative father whom a court of competent jurisdiction has found not to be the child’s legal parent or who has filed a petition for filiation that was dismissed if no appeal from the judgment or order is pending.

(5) If a guardian ad litem has been appointed for a parent under ORS 419B.231 (Appointment), a copy of a summons served on the parent under this section must be provided to the guardian ad litem. [2001 c.622 §13; 2003 c.205 §9; 2005 c.160 §3; 2005 c.450 §6; 2009 c.595 §365; 2017 c.651 §43]

Notes of Decisions

Under Former Similar Statutes

Due process does not require the appoint­ment of “independent counsel” to represent the child in every adop­tion or termina­tion of parental rights pro­ceed­ing. F. v. C., 24 Or App 601, 547 P2d 175 (1976)

When sec­ond termina­tion of parental rights pro­ceed­ing was not itself barred, proof was not limited by res judicata or collateral estoppel principles to facts or evidence which was not considered in or which came in to being after first pro­ceed­ing. State ex rel Juvenile Dept. v. Newman, 49 Or App 221, 619 P2d 901 (1980), Sup Ct review denied

Chapter 419B

Notes of Decisions

Due process rights of parents are al­ways implicated in construc­tion and applica­tion of pro­vi­sions of this chapter. Depart­ment of Human Services v. J.R.F., 351 Or 570, 273 P3d 87 (2012)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 419B—Juvenile Code: Dependency, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors419B.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2017, Chapter 419B, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano419B.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.